FreeBSDOperating system
CVE-2020-7469
Official description Straight from the sourceThe vendor's or NVD's own wording, published unedited. Authoritative, but often terse — it says what broke, rarely what to do.
NVD · uneditedIn FreeBSD 12.2-STABLE before r367402, 11.4-STABLE before r368202, 12.2-RELEASE before p1, 12.1-RELEASE before p11 and 11.4-RELEASE before p5 the handler for a routing option caches a pointer into the packet buffer holding the ICMPv6 message. However, when processing subsequent options the packet buffer may be freed, rendering the cached pointer invalid. The network stack may later dereference the pointer, potentially triggering a use-after-free.
Technical summary Written by usOur analysis, written from the advisory, the CVSS vector and the affected-version data. It adds context the advisory leaves out, and never invents facts that are not in the source.
dbcve analysis · high confidenceA use-after-free vulnerability exists in FreeBSD's ICMPv6 routing option handler. The handler caches a pointer into the packet buffer containing the ICMPv6 message, but subsequent option processing may free the buffer, invalidating the cached pointer which is later dereferenced by the network stack.
Verify against the referenced sources before acting — the references below are authoritative for this CVE, this summary is not.
Affected products & versions What the vendor confirmedThe version ranges the vendor confirmed as vulnerable. If your version sits inside a range here, treat yourself as exposed until you have upgraded.
NVD · CPE data
FreeBSDOperating system
= 11.4= 12.1= 12.2all versionsCVSS breakdown How the score is builtThe industry scoring standard. It rates how the flaw is reached, what it takes to exploit, and what an attacker gains — the score is derived from those, not the other way round.
From the vector- Attack vector
- Network
- Complexity
- Low
- Privileges
- None
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- None
- Integrity
- None
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H
Am I affected? How to checkSteps we derive from the advisory and the affected-version data, so you can decide whether this CVE reaches your setup. They are a guide, not a scan — your own configuration is the authority.
dbcve checksWork through these to decide whether this CVE applies to you.
-
Identify the operating systemRun 'uname -a' or check system documentation to determine if the target is FreeBSD or NetApp Clustered Data OntapAffected if The system is FreeBSD 11.4, 12.1, or 12.2, or NetApp Clustered Data Ontap of any version
-
Check FreeBSD versionRun 'freebsd-version -k' or 'uname -r' to get the exact FreeBSD versionAffected if The version is 11.4, 12.1, or 12.2 (all patch levels)
-
Verify ICMPv6 is enabledRun 'sysctl net.inet6.icmp6.rediraccept' or check network interface configuration for IPv6 and ICMPv6 processingAffected if ICMPv6 processing is enabled (net.inet6.icmp6.rediraccept is not set to 0)
-
Check for the security patchReview the kernel source or check patch status; look for the presence of fix r367402 (12.2) or r368202 (11.4), or check if release patches p1/p5/p11 have been appliedAffected if The FreeBSD security patches have NOT been applied to the running kernel
The environment is affected if it runs FreeBSD 11.4, 12.1, or 12.2 (unpatched) or NetApp Clustered Data Ontap (any version) with ICMPv6 enabled and processing routing options.
Generated from the published advisory. Verify against your own configuration.
Remediation Closing itWhat it takes to close this. Where a vendor fix exists we point at it; where none exists we say so plainly, and can build one. Effort estimates are scoped from the advisory, not from your codebase.
From vendor dataApply the appropriate FreeBSD security patches (r367402 for 12.2-STABLE, r368202 for 11.4-STABLE, or the respective release patches p1, p11, p5) to fix the memory management issue in the ICMPv6 routing option handler.
Fix this in FreeBSD
Scoped from the published advisory
- Consultation2.0 h
- Implementation4.0 h
- Testing6.0 h
- Review / QA2.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $3,808.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2020-7469 — or any other known-vulnerable package — straight from your lock files. Free and open source; it runs locally and uploads nothing.
References Go to the primary sourcePrimary sources — vendor advisories, patches and trackers. Where our summary and a reference disagree, the reference wins.
Primary sourcesPractitioner notes
ContributedPeer-ranked notes from engineers who’ve handled CVE-2020-7469 in production — separate from our analysis above.
The advisory tells you what broke. It rarely tells you what actually worked. If you’ve dealt with this one, that detail is what the next engineer is searching for.
- The version that genuinely resolved it — not the one the vendor claimed
- A config change or rule that shut the vector down
- A gotcha in the upgrade path that cost you an afternoon
No notes yet
Be the first to add a field note for this CVE — a mitigation you’ve verified, a version caveat, or a link to a working fix. Sign in above to contribute.
A place for practitioners to share what actually worked: a mitigation you’ve tested, a configuration change, a version- or environment-specific caveat, or a link to a verified patch. The most useful notes rise to the top as peers upvote them, so the signal stays high.
- Verified mitigations, workarounds, and config changes
- Version or environment caveats, and links to real fixes
- No weaponised exploit code, or anything meant to cause harm
- No spam, self-promotion, credentials, or personal data